Thank you, committee. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a few general comments with respect to the NWT Housing Corporation. A long-outstanding issue, and I don't sit on the Social Programs committee so I don't know if it's been identified or addressed, but a long-outstanding issue that's been talked about ever since the rent scale was introduced in the 13th Assembly that introduced the concept of zero rent for seniors in public housing. Ever since that occurred there has been a philosophical debate as to the fairness of that program in view of the cost to seniors who live independently in their own homes and the relatively small amount of support available to them.

The other thing that you can compare that free rent to is not just seniors living in their own independent homes, but also the fact that if they go into a care facility in the Northwest Territories where they are provided even a minimal amount of care, that they are, and reasonably, I think, expected to pay between $700 and $800 a month for that care that they receive. So there are gaps and inconsistencies in how seniors are treated and it causes a lot of division. Understanding that perhaps in some of the smaller more remote communities not a lot of seniors live in their own privately owned homes, but in the market communities it does become an issue.

I guess I don't really have the answer or solution to that inconsistency, but I hope that the Housing Corporation is turning their mind to how they can just make it a more fair process and how they would be able to give ample and adequate advance notice to seniors who have decided to partake in the Public Housing Program and who are receiving free rent and were counting on that. Now if the rules are going to be changed, I just think it's good to give everybody as much advance notice as possible.

On the subject of the affordable housing allocations, again, I would just hope that the Housing Corporation has put some thought and consideration when they're allocating those units to the issue of need as opposed to just doing it on a so many units per community no matter what. Because I think in this House, at least, we all represent very different communities and I think there's a pretty sound consensus that not all communities have the same degree of need for more housing as might another. So I think the Housing Corporation needs to be alive to that fact and allocate housing units on that basis.

Something that I still find a little bit curious is the reoccurring advertisement in the Yellowknife newspapers every week advertising subsidized housing through the housing authorities. There's a little disclaimer in brackets at the bottom and it says this is not an ad intended to solicit tenants. I don't know why that disclaimer is there. Maybe it was something that was raised by the private sector landlords or something. But it said it's for information purposes. Anyway, I just find it...You would think that people who were in need of support in housing would have their names on lists and it just seems...The message I get from that is that there's an overabundance of public housing units if it's necessary to spend money every week to advertise that there's subsidized housing available. That's the message that I get from it.

The other thing I just wanted to mention was that when in the budget you talk about the replacement of existing social housing inventory, I'd like to know what the process is going to be for disposing of. Now, in some instances it may be demolition of existing housing, but I think in other cases there's probably some market or economic value left to those units. So if you're going to replace a group of units, I think it's fair and, again, appropriate that people in the community would know by what process you're going to dispose of those and that it should be a very open and transparent process for the disposal of those government assets or those Housing Corporation assets.

So those are just some of the things that I wanted to touch on during general comments. Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll try to be brief on the three main issues that I heard. First of all, on the situation where seniors currently enjoy fully subsidized houses even though they may have sold their own private home and have a large bank account and similar kind of situations is a policy that was set a long time ago and it was not, at that time, contemplated that we'd have this situation where you have an increasing number of seniors who own homes and are getting into this kind of thing. Mr. Chairman, there's probably a good reason, a good example of why we wanted to consolidate our subsidies so we can make some sense out of it, because one department is doing one thing and someone else is doing another. So this issue falls more with ECE right now. The Housing Corporation is working with ECE. We have heard the message from the Social Programs and from other MLAs saying, well, we don't quite like what's going on here. We, working with ECE, will be bringing forward something for consideration that says here's a better way of handling this kind of situation, because there has to be some way of taking into account a situation where there's a large amount of assets that someone has. Even though they may not have a steady stream of income, they still could have a million dollars in the bank. So that one is an issue. That's one we're looking at with ECE.

The second one, I haven't seen the ads from the LHOs advertising subsidized housing, but I'm told they are out there. What the LHOs are trying to do is to help people to know that there are other avenues for them, that there is affordable housing out there, there is a concern about people in inadequate housing. They're not trying to advertise for more clients, they're just trying to make sure that everybody knows. I think the exercise of consolidating and streamlining our programs will make it more understandable for people to follow what support is available to them.

Judging by the number of calls I get to my office, there are a lot of people out there who are just not familiar with what the programs are and how they access them and who's eligible and so on. That's the second one.

Third issue raised by the Member was in regard to disposal of public housing units that are no longer required. Most often we want to use the land, so we would like to have them moved. If we need the land, we want them moved. We will make the unit available to the community and members in the community first on conditions that it's not going to end up back in our inventory through some other way. We don't want the unit back if we're demolishing it. So first of all it will be sold. People may have taken them out of the community and use them on the land or use them somewhere else, or they may even decide to retrofit them themselves. Failing that, then we would demolish the units and have someone in the community contracted to do that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to go back to the whole seniors thing again because I was being extremely careful as I was portraying that situation because I don't, like I said, I am not prescribing the solution to this, I am just identifying it again as an issue. The Premier got into the detail of means testing and whether people have the resources to live on their own. That's a very touchy, controversial subject and I didn't go there and I don't really want to go there. All I'm saying is that when you have senior A living here, totally taking care of themselves in their own independent home and getting relatively little support from this government, that's one type of senior constituent out there. Then there could be another person living in zero-cost housing, and then again I brought up the issue of the assisted living situations we have in some of our care facilities where, again, seniors are expected to contribute to the cost of their living through a fee that is between $700 and $800. All I am saying is that I think the system just has to be fair and has to seem to be fair and everybody should know what the rules are. Like I said, I think that is something that needs to be arrived at in consultation with the seniors themselves and just making note that it has caused some division in communities. Some seniors are very proud and they take great pride up into their very late years in their own home independently. It would be nice if there was some way of just levelling it a bit so they can get a little bit of support to continue to do that while, at the same time, maybe there would be some nominal kind of amount that everybody could contribute to the fund that would help do that.

The awareness campaign, I agree; people should be made aware that there is the possibility...Oh, sorry. My time is up, but I will just finish off this thought. There is an element, there is a requirement I think on the part of the Housing Corporation to create awareness and the LHOs to create awareness about what is available to people in the communities. Putting in something that looks like an ad on a classified page under a category called "for rent" I don't think is the only way you can create that awareness. It is one place, but I don't think it is the most appropriate place. There are opportunities for referrals to social housing offices, things like that.

Just to the last point where the Premier responded with respect to the disposal of no longer required inventory or inventory that is being replaced, I think that in some communities you may find there is new land to build on and that it wouldn't be economic to move units off the existing lots. It just wouldn't make sense for anybody. When you say made available to the community, I don't know exactly what that means, but I think that there may be a process similar to Crown assets disposal or disposal of any government asset that would be just an open, competitive, transparent process where units would be advertised and put on the open market could be sold or they could be offered to the tenant that is occupying them now that is a public housing client. There are various ways it could be done. I just want to ensure that it is going to be very fair and transparent. I don't think it is always going to viable to move units off because there may be land readily available developed in some of the communities. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I realize the issue around senior subsidies is always a touchy one. It is one, though, that we have to face straight up because there are an increasing number of people who will retire in the North because of the benefits we have in the North, whether it is health care, education, housing or whatever that may be, so we have to look at how can we level that playing field. I agree with Mrs. Groenewegen; it has to be a level playing field that is fair to everybody. So that one we will continue to work with ECE.

With the LHO ads, I agree the newspaper is fine for some things, but there are other ways of advertising. We do have a website. I think we just launched today or yesterday on a new program consolidation. We will do some newspaper ads. We have some brochures going out, and the Housing Corporation is also doing community visits on the new consolidated housing choices.

On the third one, getting rid of the old public housing units, you almost have to look at each case by case. In some situations, those units occupy prime pieces of land right in the middle of the community. The communities all want to have a nice looking community, a community that has a core to it, not boarded up houses, so they often want it moved. We will consult with the communities before we would ever move into them or sell them or whatever would happen. So that one is more a case of having to almost look at each case by case and deal with the local leaders. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. I don't have anybody on the list for general comments.

Before we go any further, I just wanted to make mention, I know we have a number of visitors in the gallery with us here this afternoon. Just for your information, we are on designated budget days which means we sit from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, thus us being in Committee of the Whole while you are in attendance. I would like to start off with recognizing the Western Arctic Aboriginal Headstart Council that is with us in the gallery. They are here to celebrate the Western Arctic Aboriginal Headstart, 10 years of Aboriginal Headstart in the Northwest Territories, 1996 to 2006. That is an evaluation booklet. The booklet will be launched tomorrow, February 14th, at 12:30 p.m. in the Great Hall of the Legislative Assembly. All are welcome to attend. With us this afternoon we have Julie Anne Blake from Fort McPherson;

---Applause

Clara Elias from Inuvik;

---Applause

Ed Hunter from Fort Smith;

---Applause

Joyce Villeneuve from Fort Providence, the Deh Cho region;

---Applause

Nancy Lefleur from the Deh Cho region;

---Applause

Leonie Vermillion from the Deh Cho region;

---Applause

Ms. Reanna Erasmus from Ndilo;

---Applause

Marjorie Matheson Maund from Behchoko;

---Applause

Marlyss Richardson from Behchoko;

---Applause

Louise Richardson, also from Behchoko;

---Applause

Liz Cayen from Inuvik;

---Applause

and the principal researcher, Dr. Jennifer Chalmers.

---Applause

Welcome. Also I noticed in the gallery, we have town councillor from Hay River, Mr. Kevin Wallington. Welcome.

---Applause

Anyone I have missed, welcome to our proceedings this afternoon. It is always nice to have a gallery. Mahsi.

---Applause

So we will now move on to the Housing Corporation detail. If I could suggest, we will defer to the end of the corporate summary located on page 2-149, and we will start if Members want to get their binders ready. We are on page 2-151. That is executive, operations expenditure summary, $544,000.

Page 2-153, planning programs and strategic direction, operations expenditure summary, $1.659 million.

Page 2-155, finance and strategic investments, operations expenditure summary, $8.037 million.

Page 2-156, finance and strategic investments, grants and contributions, contributions, $4.492 million.

Page 2-159, debt repayment, operations expenditure summary, $12.197 million.

Page 2-161, infrastructure development, operations expenditure summary, $3.777 million

Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In this area, we see that this division looks after the support and technical direction related to construction and maintenance of housing units. It is responsible for surveying, inspection, assessment and evaluation of energy efficiency in

construction design. I would like to explore a little bit, Mr. Chair, this notion of energy efficiency in construction design and I guess ask if there is, in summary, Mr. Chair, in a snapshot form just what kind of initiatives is the Housing Corporation undertaking with today's prices and technology to pursue energy efficiency in the upgrades or new construction that it is undertaking, Mr. Chair?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In a nutshell, there are a number of things we are doing on the building envelope that go from the kinds of insulation, the thickness of insulation, the R value, the windows, the exterior doors, the design of the building itself, airlocks and entryways and so on. We look at that. We look at the mechanical systems. That is the heating system, the boilers. We look at the possibility of areas hybrid kind of hot water heating systems, wood stoves, plumbing fixtures and so on. With electrical systems, we do the same thing. We look at the kind of light bulbs. In other houses, we are piloting things like Conematics and so on.